Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:25:50 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@sneakerz.org> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com>, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, David O'Brien <nobody@nuix.com> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet tcp_usrreq.c Message-ID: <20010718222549.O28164@sneakerz.org> In-Reply-To: <20010718214902.H6519-100000@achilles.silby.com>; from silby@silby.com on Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 10:04:45PM -0500 References: <20010718121851.B26558@dragon.nuxi.com> <20010718214902.H6519-100000@achilles.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> [010718 22:04] wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > > In any case, both NMBUFS and NMBCLUSTERS can be easily overriden with > > > the respective boot-time tunable parameters. And remember, these values are > > > merely used to reserve KVA space. > > > > BUT they should be pretty reasonable numbers to start with. People > > continue to "benchmark" FreeBSD out of the box. We need to start paying > > more attention to the out-of-the-box settings. > > > > -- > > -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) > > With tcp templates out of the way, it looks like mbufs aren't such a big > deal anymore; they'll certainly decrease performance, but will no longer > set a definite ceiling on the max number of sockets useable > simultaneously. You'll notice that there's 'redundant' (for lack of a better word) storage allocated in a socket. Basically, a socket can be a data socket, or a listening socket, you can recover at least 32 bytes per socket if you unionize based on the type. -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010718222549.O28164>